Kerala

StateCommission

A/15/733

FITNESS FORUM BRANCH 213/7, - Complainant(s)

Versus

PRADHEESH CHACKO - Opp.Party(s)

BOBY K JOSEPH

12 Oct 2015

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SISUVIHARLANE VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

APPEAL NO.733/2015 IN IA.NO.1242/15

JUDGMENT DATED : 12.10.2015

 

(Appeal filed against the order in CC.No.200/2014 on the file of CDRF, kalpetta order dated : 28.01.2015)

 

PRESENT

 

SRI.K.CHANDRADAS NADAR     : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SMT.A.RADHA                               : MEMBER

SMT.SANTHAMMA THOMAS      : MEMBER

 

APPELLANT

 

FITNESS FORUM,

BRANCH 213/7,

SBP 11/608 H. Aniyeri complex,
Beenachi Post,

Sulthan Bathery,

Wayanad District

 

(By Adv.Sri.Shyam V. & Adv.Sri.Boby K.Joseph)

 

Vs

RESPONDENT

 

PRADEESH CHACKO,

S/o.Chacko,

Vellamattathil (H), Nagaramchal,

Noolpuzha.P.O

Kuppadi Village,

Sulthan Bathery Taluk, Wayanad

 

JUDGMENT

 

SRI.K.CHANDRADAS NADAR     : JUDICIAL MEMBER

          The opposite party in CC.No.200/2014 in the CDRF, Kalpetta has preferred this appeal along with the application to condone the delay of 150 days in preferring the appeal. The complaint was for an order to direct the opposite party to replace the machine supplied by him or in the alternative to refund the cost of the machine on the allegation that the machine suffered from manufacturing defects. It is seen that notice was served on the complaint to the appellant on 24.10.2014. But he failed to appear before the consumer forum and was set exparte on 16.12.2014 and an exparte order allowing the complaint was passed. The learned counsel who appeared for the appellant was heard at the time of admission.

          2.      The only allegation in the memorandum of appeal is that on the date fixed for his appearance the opposite party was present before the consumer forum. But the advocates were on strike. It is not at all explained why the appellant / opposite party failed to appear before the forum though he had more than two months notice. Even if it is accepted that on the date fixed for his appearance the advocates were on strike, no reason is mentioned why the appellant failed to file vakalath on the next day which would have prevented exparte order being passed. Not only that the appeal is filed after a long delay of 150 days. Only a lame excuse is alleged that he was suffering from jaundice. But there is nothing to indicate that he was actually suffering from any illness as alleged. So the intention is clear that the appellants want to prevent the consumer forum from executing the order or at least to delay the execution of the order without any apparent reason. So we find no reason to admit the appeal for hearing. Accordingly, both the appeal as well as the application are dismissed.

K.CHANDRADAS NADAR   : JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

 

A.RADHA                               : MEMBER

 

 

SANTHAMMA THOMAS      : MEMBER

 

 

Be/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KERALA STATE

 CONSUMER DISPUTES

 REDRESSAL COMMISSION

SISUVIHARLANE

VAZHUTHACAD

U THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

APPEAL NO.733/2015

IN

IA.NO.1242/15

JUDGMENT DATED : 12.10.2015

 

 

Be/